reagan - overrated?

[JosephTheLibertarian]

*good leadership skills
*probably really cared
*did nothing of what he promised to do. Government actually expanded under his Presidency
*accepted a skull & bones neocon as his VP


overrated? I don't doubt that he was a nice guy, I just don't really know what the big thing with Reagan is? He threatened the Soviets....and? Socialism doesn't work, the free marketeers (including Ron Paul) knew this back in the peak of the Cold War. Of course, true free marketeers have always been ignored throughout the 20th century. Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard

[kylejack]

Not entirely his fault government expanded. He was very busy with the veto pen, but sometimes the Democrats over-rode his vetos.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Not entirely his fault government expanded. He was very busy with the veto pen, but sometimes the Democrats over-rode his vetos.

Why didn't he eliminate some of the departments? He could have! He just really blown his shot... maybe he made Bush sr. his VP in order to win?

[kylejack]

Why didn't he eliminate some of the departments? He could have! He just really blown his shot... maybe he made Bush sr. his VP in order to win?
He pushed for elimination of the Department of Education, but couldn't get it through the Congress. The President is not a dictator, and RP will face the same problems.

[werdd]

Reagan was a great president because he "failed to see the irrationality of middle eastern politics" and thus pulled out and focused on more important things. If our current president possesed this quality, we might be in a good place right now.

[pcosmar]

I was not really happy with some of his positions and results, That said , he was the best we have had for many years.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

He pushed for elimination of the Department of Education, but couldn't get it through the Congress. The President is not a dictator, and RP will face the same problems.

Why did he waste money on the War on Drugs?

[kylejack]

Why did he waste money on the War on Drugs?
I will agree that was one of his failings. There was a lot of popular support for it at the time, because of the invention of crack creating an affordable form of cocaine that became popular in the ghetto and the consequent effects. Still, he was one of the more libertarian presidents in recent history, if there is such a thing.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I will agree that was one of his failings. There was a lot of popular support for it at the time, because of the invention of crack creating an affordable form of cocaine that became popular in the ghetto and the consequent effects. Still, he was one of the more libertarian presidents in recent history, if there is such a thing.

Maybe he pushed it for political purposes? I don't think he thought it would end drug use in America. Do drug dealers put guns to people's head if they don't do drugs? lol cmon

[kylejack]

Maybe he pushed it for political purposes? I don't think he thought it would end drug use in America. Do drug dealers put guns to people's head if they don't do drugs? lol cmon
I agree, he wasn't perfect, but he still did a good job shaping the language on spending and taxation, and vetoed a ton of bills, something which Bush didn't do for his entire first term, practically.

[pcosmar]

That was the biggest problem for me also. I think he was as much a victim of the Shadow Government as a part of it.
Ron Paul has said that he will expose some of that.
That is my hope.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Is it true that Reagan was once a Democrat?

[RockEnds]

Why did he waste money on the War on Drugs?

On a slightly sarcastic note, I always figured Reagan was just a Steppenwolf fan, and I place ultimate responsibility on The Pusher:


Well now if I were the president of this land
You know I'd declare total war on the pusher man.
I'd cut him if he stands, and I'd shoot him if he run,
And I'd kill him with my bible, and my razor and my gun....

Someone, somewhere took the lyrics of that song entirely too seriously.

[Original_Intent]

I think he is over-rated and I think Ron paul was disappointed in his performance as president. That being said he was probably still the best president in most of our lifetimes.

[Primbs]

Reagan had two factions fighting within his administration. Moderates vs. conservatives.

Reagan did appoint govt. cost cutters who would let elevators in govt. buildings go unfixed to discourage bureaucrats from showing up for work.

There were many libertarian types in the Reagan administration.

Reagan was the only president who would bring the federal budget to the state of the union speech and slam the thousand page book on the lectern and said this massive government spending has to stop.

Reagan proposed many cuts, but was shot down by the Democrat congress which controls appropriations.

Reagan didn't have many conservative friends to help him. There was very little conservative talk radio and many conservatives attacked Reagan for minor things.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Why didn't he have Ron Paul as his VP? Or maybe a cabinet position? Gheeze, Ron Paul would be more respected right now!

[Original_Intent]

I have heard that Bush Sr. was forced on Reagan at the convention. I don't have sources, it is just what I have heard.

[winston84]

I do believe he is overrated as well, I think evoking his image is just a way to bring back some sort of Republican nostalgia.

[RonPaulForLife]

It's widely accepted that Reagan said one thing about government spending, but did another. Kind of like our president today!

It seems like Ron Paul was disappointed in Reagan and we should be too.

[klamath]

An all you that were disappointed in Reagan will probably be more disapointed in RP. When he doesn't wave his hand and the country is pure again, you will be cursing him.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Ron Paul is better than Reagan.

[klamath]

I would have voted for Reagan over RP in 1980 but I would vote for RP over Reagan now. The times are different.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I would vote for RP everytime

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Ron Paul is an idealist; everything he does will be principled. Ron Paul just doesn't play politics. Ron Paul will most definitely "stay the course." ;) no doubt about it. It's about time we had a President that is uncompromising in a positive way for once!

[PaleoForPaul]

A few things:

1. Reagan didn't want Bush as his running mate. He wanted Ford, but Ford wouldn't take the job unless it was a co-presidency type power-sharing deal. Reagan didn't want Bush as his VP even AFTER that, which was probably bitterness from the primaries. Bush 1 coined the phrase 'Voodoo Economics' to describe Reagan's desired tax cuts. The party lobbied Reagan into taking Bush.

It's fun to thing about what would have happened if Ford had taken him up on the offer to be VP, you'd probably never have Bush 1, and with no Bush 1 you have no Bush 2.

2. Reagan was a democrat when he was young, he changes parties once he was in his 20's IIRC. It was while he was an actor.

3. Reagan at least gave lip service to getting rid of the dept of education. The current Republicans don't even do that except RP.

Overall Reagan was much better than Bush 1 or 2, take that for what it's worth.

Was he 'overrated'? It's all opinion really. I think he did well. He lowered the tax rate on the highest bracket from 70 percent to the 30's IIRC over 7 years. Can you imagine being taxed 70%, even if you're rich that is a lot of money to give to the government.

[Shellshock1918]

*accepted a skull & bones neocon as his VP



Probably was threatened to do so. If I remember correctly, they hated each other during the run for the nomination and if what I hear is true, according to his diary he didn't like him that well while they were in the white house.

[Shellshock1918]

Why did he waste money on the War on Drugs?

Let it be noted that drug use during Reagan's tenure PLUMMETED.

It only resurged during the 90s and today.

[johngr]

An all you that were disappointed in Reagan will probably be more disapointed in RP. When he doesn't wave his hand and the country is pure again, you will be cursing him.

One big difference between Ronald Reagan and Ron Paul: Ron Paul has the moral clarity to oppose the income tax on principle (Ronald Reagan merely thought it was too high) and the moral courage to stop enforcing it.

[Meatwasp]

Pres. Reagan appointed James Watt. He was going to let people in Alaska homestead and the Eco freaks and press knocked him down.
Reagan tried his best on everything. He was a good president.

[klamath]

I really didn't want to get into this debate but like normal people like to bring up subjects that will hurt RP's cause as long as they have their free speach.
I remember how Reagan was savaged by the democrats and the press about the soup kitchens, the Reaganvilles, the homeless, and how he cut the safety net. I remember how he lost 24 house seats in '82, a House that was already controled by the democrats. I remember how every budget he proposed was declared "dead on Arrival" by the the congressional leaders.
We will see how RP does when he refuses to sign an unbalanced budget and every federal worker is out on the street and every state worker that relies on federal funding as well. Wait until he loses 100 house seats and 25 senate seats. How effective will he be?
Reagan wasn't perfect and neither is RP. The American people are not going to give RP a congress that will go along with him. They will give him a congress that will be fighting tooth and nail to keep everyones favorite federal program. That is the reality of our politics.

[Meatwasp]

We have to get Libertarians in office to break the gridlock.

[Bob Cochran]

Is it true that Reagan was once a Democrat?

Absolutely. Haven't they heard of Google in your parts? You COULD just Google Ronald Reagan, ya know.

[Bob Cochran]

I have trouble "rating" the Reagan presidency, due to sentimentality, as his 8 years was a fantastic time in my life. I didn't think much of him at the time, as I was a young adult who had been raised in a Democrat household.

Now I think a great deal of the guy, and my fondness was cemented when I visited the Reagan Library 2-1/2 years ago. He was my Commander In Chief during my five years in the Army. I got married and both of my kids were born when he was President.

I remember his optimism. I remember his big cockeyed grin and the twinkle in his eye. I remember how he got us to think highly about ourselves again after Carter wanted us all to apologize to the world for being Americans. I remember how he lived after a bullet through his chest. I remember how much he loved his wife, and how she loved him. I remember reading for the first time that he had been a lifeguard who had saved dozens of lives (no one has credibly refuted his claim to have saved 77 people, as far as I know). I remember him firing the air traffic controllers.

I have read the Reagan diary excerpts. I'm aware of things his kids have said about him -- both the negative and the positive. I watched his funeral on TV. I saw even Mikhail Gorbachev reverently lay a hand on his coffin. I saw real grief in the faces and voices and body language of other ex world leaders.

On June 12, 1987, President Reagan stood in Berlin and said, "Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" The gate was opened, the wall was torn down. As a cold warrior, I helped that happen in my own tiny way, or so I would like to think. But Reagan led the charge.

Scandals? You call Iran-Contra a scandal? Puh-leeeez. That was kids playing Batman and Robin. Watergate, now THAT was a nice proper scandal. Bill Clinton trying subvert the judicial system, THAT was a scandal. Dubya and Darth Cheney marching us straight into the jaws of fascism, THAT is a scandal...a heinous crime, even.

Ronald Reagan was not a war-monger. He wanted peace and he believed a strong defense was necessary to maintain peace. Dubya, on the other hand...what a dangerous, reckless fool by comparison.

For me, Ronald Reagan was more of a king than a president. He was the last of our presidents who exhibited the best American sensibilities of decency and nobility. This man understood the kind of liberty Ron Paul talks about.

The sun sets on his grave every evening in Simi Valley, California. I have been to that place and I know that it may very well be the resting place of the last great American President we will ever see.

If Ron Paul gets elected through some sequence of miracles, then we'll revisit that...

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Absolutely. Haven't they heard of Google in your parts? You COULD just Google Ronald Reagan, ya know.

Have you ever heard of being an asshole? You sure sound like one, ya know

[JosephTheLibertarian]

We have to get Libertarians in office to break the gridlock.

LP is going nowhere. They haven't held ONE respectable office in all their years lol pitiful. They should start concentrating more on party recognition and less on expecting people to declare themselves Libertarian on their own. Idk what they're doing, but strategy doesn't seem to be working, I have been tracking them and I'm seeing voter turnouts going down every election.

[Bob Cochran]

Have you ever heard of being an asshole? You sure sound like one, ya know
:D:D:D

[BillyBeer]

Plain and simple, Reagan went senile. Thats the only explanation I have for his War on Drugs.

[DrNoZone]

Ronald Reagan had some good qualities, but overall he didn't put his money where his mouth was. War on (some) Drugs anyone? I mean, if that didn't go against everything he campaign on, I don't know what did.

[J4ck]

..Reagan was a good man...but a lot of things went wrong during his presidency and the neocons took over very soon.
His presidency is definitely overrated, the man not.

[J4ck]

It was pretty much over wenn he accepted Bush as vp.

[J4ck]

'when' , sry i'm tired. -.-

[nexus7]

When Reagan banned carrying guns in the state of California, he really blew it.

[Gammerus]

The war on drugs had good intentions, and at the point we didn't know exactly how it would affect America...Now it is rather obvious that it hasn't helped.

[Primbs]

Those who voted for Reagan are going to be needed to get Ron Paul elected.

Ron Paul was one of only a handful of congressmen who endorsed Reagan.

Being closely allied to Reagan is not a bad thing for this campaign. Reagan won two electoral landslides.

[rg123]

I had to look deep into my computer for this one. I think you will find it interesting.
Check near bottom of this for CFR influence on Bush for VP.

This article comes from
Tom Flocco.com
http://tomflocco.com/




HINCKLEY AND BUSH FAMILIES WERE CLOSE FRIENDS
December 22, 2003



HINCKLEY AND BUSH FAMILIES WERE CLOSE FRIENDS

by Connie Cook Smith
(printed with permission)
http://www.conniescomments.blogspot.com

Everyone knows who John Hinckley, Jr. is. This youngest Hinckley son is now being permitted unsupervised visits within the Washington, DC metropolitan area--away from his mental facility, after nearly killing President Reagan in 1981. But a much more interesting subject is, who is John Hinckley, Sr.?

In 1980, Hinckley Sr. was a Texas oilman who, the records show, strove mightily to get fellow Texas oilman George H.W. Bush the Republican nomination for president. The Bushes and the Hinckleys were frequent dinner companions.

But far beyond their social connection, neither Bush nor Hinckley wanted Ronald Reagan to become president, because Reagan was opposed to tax breaks for the oil industry to which Bush, Hinckley and other Texans were highly dependent.

The effort to make Bush Sr. president in 1980 failed; but he and his friend and backer Hinckley Sr. got the next best thing – the "heartbeat away from the presidency" office of Vice-President of the United States.

A couple months later, Hinckley Jr. shot Reagan, and Bush Sr. very nearly did become president at that time, after all. Curiously, only one time was it announced on the news about the connections between the Bush and Hinckley families: An almost bewildered John Chancellor on NBC Nightly News reported "the bizarre coincidence" that Vice President Bush's son, Neil, and Scott Hinckley had dinner plans for March 31, 1981 -- now cancelled, of course. [But even Chancellor failed to mention the close friendship between the the assassin's father and Vice President Bush--let alone the rest of the corporate media.]

Reports indicate that the Bush family strove mightily to keep this information from the American people. And some reports list this incredible "coincidence" -- directly linked to the assassination attempt of President Reagan -- as one of the most spiked stories of the last century.

In other words, the brother of the shooter and the son of the vice-president (and their wives) had a dinner date for the day after the shooting. But it really wasn’t such "a bizarre coincidence." Those two families were very close; but the press never focused on that critical fact as it should have. If Reagan had died, the oilmen’s interests would have been served.

Some people think that Hinckley Jr. was mind-controlled, CIA-style, to shoot Reagan. George Bush Sr. was head of the CIA a few years before. Others think that young Hinckley wanted to please his dad and get Bush, his dad’s candidate and close friend, into the presidency for him after all.

Interestingly, legal experts note that the crime occurred in Washington, D.C., the only venue in the United States at that time which recognized an insanity defense. If the kid committed the crime in D.C., he would never serve hard time? Well, coincidentally, that's where he committed it.

A very good read on the Hinckley-Bush connections is a book that came out about 20 years ago, entitled, "The Afternoon of March 30." It was published as a novel in order to protect the author. This book is now more relevant than ever, and it can be obtained at:
http://www.nathanielblumberg.com/bush.htm.

But there’s another coincidence to mention. In January of 1963, President John F. Kennedy announced his plan to cut the tax breaks for the oil industry. Oilmen H.L. Hunt, George H.W. Bush (head of Zapata Petroleum), and others were no doubt enraged. What a curious twist of fate that Kennedy was shot in Texas later that same year.

In the 1990's, LBJ’s now-undisputed mistress Madeleine Brown announced that LBJ told her that Kennedy was murdered "by the oil people, and aspects of the CIA."

And gosh, one more coincidence – we now have another Bush, the oilman’s son, becoming U.S. President in a very quirky election. And many individuals believe he gave the American people completely phony reasons for invading Iraq-- one of the most oil-rich nations in the Middle East.

Hmm....

[ Sidebar: Many other significant facts concerning the Bush and Hinckley families have remained unexplored and unexplained, in addition to other matters related to the assassination attempt detailed in Blumberg's book which is found at:
http://www.nathanielblumberg.com/bush.htm :

1. Neil Bush, a landman for Amoco Oil, told Denver reporters he had met Scott Hinckley at a surprise party at the Bush home January 23, 1981 [Nine weeks before Hinckley's brother John Jr. attempted to assassinate President Reagan--which would have elevated Bush Sr. to the presidency], and approximately three weeks after the U.S. Department of Energy had begun what was termed a "routine audit" of the books of the Vanderbilt Energy Corporation, the Hinckley oil company. In an incredible coincidence, on the morning of March 30 [the day of the Reagan assassination attempt by John Hinckley, Jr.], three representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy told Scott Hinckley, John Hinckley Jr.'s older brother and Vanderbilt's vice president of operations, that auditors had uncovered evidence of pricing violations on crude oil sold by the company from 1977 through 1980. The auditors announced that the federal government was considering a penalty of two million dollars. [This, on the same day that his brother John--the youngest son of Vice President Bush's close friend--attempted the assassination!] Scott Hinckley reportedly requested "several hours to come up with an explanation" of the serious overcharges. The meeting ended a little more than an hour before John Hinckly Jr. shot President Reagan.

2. Excerpts from an interview by Theresa Walla, United Press International, March 9, 1985: Journalism professor Nathaniel Blumberg was so disturbed about the investigation into the attempted assassination of President Reagan that he turned his suspicions into a 377-page novel.

In The Afternoon of March 30 , Blumberg blends fact and fiction in looking at the unreported "connections" between Hinckley's family and that of Vice President George Bush, the man who came within a heartbeat of the presidency of the United States.

"What I'm really after is the case to be officially reopened," said the Rhodes scholar and former dean of the University of Montana journalism school. "If they can answer all the questions satisfactorily, I'll be delighted," he said in an interview. "In truth, I don't think all the questions can be answered without opening up a whole new can of worms."

Blumberg's unease is now focused on the indifference shown to what he calls "the story behind the story." Bush, he said, has questions to answer in connection with the attempt. So do the FBI and the judge who presided over Hinckley's trial, according to Blumberg.

"I'm not saying there was a conspiracy to assassinate Reagan," Blumberg emphasized. "I'm saying there was a conspiracy to keep significant information from the public that it has a right to know."

Blumberg asks his readers to consider his contentions that journalists were fed a barely believable story full of inconsistencies. A long-time media critic, he decided the example warranted more than a critique of press performance in a crisis. Such efforts, he said, usually "go out there and die." Instead, he chose to weave his questions into a novel so it would reach a broader audience and allow him to probe problems in society and corruption in government, as well as maladies of the U.S. press.

His book chronicles the adventures of a fictitious Montana newsman who follows the information trail deserted by the national media. His documentation is put in the form of an article the fictitious hero is writing. Blumberg published the book on his own Wood FIRE Ashes Press to retain total control over the quality.

"Have you ever heard an author say what a great job his publisher did with a book?" he asks. But, without a commercial advertising campaign, he's had to market the book in an "organic, straightforward fashion." Blumberg says he mails out several copies of the novel each week and expects it to "stay alive as long as people continue to care about justice." ]

http://www.conniescomments.blogspot.com

(submitted/posted by Connie Cook Smith)





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


( Further Reading )

Links For The Reagan Assassination
And The Bush And Hinckley Families:

http://www.Padrak.com/alt/BUSHBOOK_7.html
THE ATTEMPTED COUP D'ETAT OF MARCH 30, 1981---Incredible Info.

http://John-Lennon.net

http://www.GeorgeWalkerBush.net

http://www.KMF.org/williams/bushbook.html

http://www.geocities.com/prohibition_us/dui.html

http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/HINCKLEY.htm

Thanks to Mark Elsis ( Lovearth.net ) for above
additional research links.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MORE LINKS AND RESEARCH ON REAGAN ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT:

[ Special thanks to Virginia Raines ( rainesco@earthlink.net ) for yet more intriguing information and incredible links concerning Bush-Hinckley, evidence that Hinckley did not carry out the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan. At the least, there has been much left out and covered up. And anyone who has the least bit of interest in getting to the TRUTH of 9-11 should take note that incredible evidence and even strikingly curious "coincidences" get swept under the rug in key historical cases such as this one. Moreover, one only needs to examine the useless 9-11 Commission which refuses to publicly examine officials in charge on the day of the attack UNDER OATH as an example of how to cover up the largest mass murder in U.S. history. Here is Virginia Raines' research and look at further evidence in the Reagan assassination attempt:

There are further questions -- particularly the World Vision connection. Here are a few bits to add to the query. Please share this information with Connie or anyone else who has doubts about the official story of the attempt on Reagan's life.

Reagan was blackmailed into taking on Bush as VP. Within just a few months, Bush Sr. was essentially co-president (or more).

"Bush is functioning much like a co-president. George is involved in all the national security stuff because of his special background as CIA director." -- White House press secretary James Brady, March 1981 Chapter XVII - 'The Attempted Coup D'Etat of March 30, 1981' 'George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography' by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin.

Video Evidence: Did Hinckley Really Shoot Reagan?
http://www.noveltynet.org/content/paranormal/www.parascope.com/mx/articles/hinckley.htm


[[Note that Reagan didn't think he was hit by a bullet at all -- and that leaves another question about just what happened; this is snipped from another page of the Tarpley and Chaitkin book]]

"Only the sixth and last bullet found Reagan, striking his armpit and tunneling into his chest. The president felt a sharp pain but thought it was only from Parr pushing him so hard. He looked at Parr and made a feeble joke: 'You sonofabitch, you broke my rib' just as the limousine raced away from the scene."


Namebase: (see social network diagram by clicking link)
http://www.namebase.org/main4/World-Vision.html



[[snipped from an intenet list -- this portion written by Brian Downing Quig]]

Of course there was a connection to Bush. The information below is very uninformed. At the time John Hinkley "shot" Reagan Hinkley's brother was having dinner with one of the Bush sons. Hinkley's father was a close friend of Bush senior and the number 2 man in a CIA front called WORLD VISION SOCIETY. The WORLD VISION SOCIETY purported to feed the world's hungry while all along their purpose was to manage refugee camps from which to recruit assassins. Today the WORLD VISION SOCIETY manages the refugee camp at the old Jones Town location where the CIA's Hmong mercenaries now are.

Chapman, the assassin of John Lennon, worked at a WORLD VISION SOCIETY managed refugee camp for the Cuban boat people at Fort Chaffee with the remnents of ALPHA 66. As Lennon was shot, president elect Reagan and his chosen CIA Director Bill Casey clinked champaign glasses a few blocks away in a New York City hotel. That is how they set the tenor of their administration.

And remember, the doctors said they removed a disc from Reagan--not a bullet. Barbara Honegger thinks Brady was the intended victim because of what he knew about the deal Reagan cut with the Iranians to delay the hostage release.



http://www.babelmagazine.com/issue82/jonestown.html:

Jonestown, CIA, World Vision, Hinckley and Bush from Internet posting:

One of the strangest CIA connections to Jonestown was World Vision, an evangelical order which often fronts for the CIA. They performed espionage work for the CIA in Southeast Asia while Operation Phoenix (the murderous project that left 40,000 people dead) was in full effect. In Honduras, they maintained a presence at CIA contra recruiting camps in the war against the Sandinistas. In Lebanon, the fascist Phalange butchered Palestinians at World Vision's camp. In Cuba, their refugee camps hosted numerous members of the anti-Castro terrorist group Alpha 66 of Bay of Pigs fame.

After the Guyana massacre, World Vision developed a scheme to repopulate Jonestown with CIA-linked mercenaries from Laos. Laos, of course, was where the CIA was running its "secret war" during Vietnam, which for the most part was a smokescreen for a widespread opium trafficking operation.

One particularly important World Vision official was John Hinckley, Sr., an oil man, reputed CIA officer, and friend of George Bush. You may have heard of his son.

Less than four months before Hinckley Jr. became known as Jodie Foster's biggest fan, another member of the World Vision order, Mark Chapman, gunned down John Lennon in what may have been a practice run for the bigger hit on President Reagan. One of the policemen who found him was convinced that he was a mind-controlled assassin. Chapman was clutching a copy of the novel "Catcher in the Rye," which was also owned by John Hinckley Jr. (The book was written by J.D. Salinger, who worked in military intelligence with Henry Kissinger during World War II.) Before going to trial, Chapman pleaded guilty after a voice in his head (which he attributed to God) commanded him to do so.

Considering the history of World Vision and what went on previously in Guyana, it is possible that the real purpose behind repopulating Jonestown was to create another breeding ground for brainwashed zombies like Chapman and Hinckley. Near Jonestown there was a place called Hilltown, a compound of 8,000 blacks that followed cult leader Rabbi David Hill, who held his flock with an iron fist. Hill had so much power that he was referred to as the "vice prime minister" of Guyana. There was also another place in Guyana called "Johnstown," as well as similar operations in the Philippines and Chile. It appears that Jonestown (and World Vision's later attempt) is hardly the exception to the rule of using obscure locations in Third World nations as laboratories for covert cult operations.

[[The "Cleon" mentioned here would be Cleon Skousen, I think. Gritz isn't always the best source for information, but what he says here can be found in other reports as well.]]



http://www.ez-websites.com/grudge/bo.htm

Excerpts from a talk given by Lt. Col. "Bo" Gritz in Mesa, Arizona on April 4, 1992:

In Mesa, I met with him [Cleon Skaas(?)] and I said, "Why in the world did Ronald Reagan sell us down the tube by taking George Bush as his running mate?" And I really didn't know that Cleon knew Ronald Reagan rather well. But he told me: He said, "Bo, George Bush was Ronald Reagan's greatest opponent," (if you'll remember, back in the 1980 elections), "and Ronald Reagan said he would never have him. Then, Ronald Reagan was invited to New York to go see Rockefeller. When he saw Rockefeller, he was told, 'If you do not take my head of the Trilateral Commission'" (remember, the Council on Foreign Relations, George Bush) "'as your running mate, the only way you'll see the inside of the White House is as a tourist.'"

Two months after he was inaugurated, two months is all that Ronald Reagan lasted. March 30th, 1981, two months after his inauguration in January of 1981, he was shot -- was he not? And the news said that he was shot by John Hinckley, Jr., and that John Hinckley, Jr., was some kind of a Jodie Foster freak. And that he came out of nowhere, and that he shot Brady in the head, and he shot a policeman in the neck, and he shot a Secret Service man and blew him back over the vehicle, and he shot Ronald Reagan. Right?

Well, remember the hardware. That's why I gave you a little introduction... I did. [Gritz had talked earlier about some sophisticated "tools of the trade."] Soon as I see this stuff I begin to wonder, because I've been a part of these kinds of operations. Let's just go back and review. It's all in the book [*Called to Serve*(?)], and so, very quickly I'll run down through you.

When Brady was shot, no question. Here we've got John Hinckley, Jr., Oh, by the way, is John Hinckley, Jr., just some kind of a "weirdo?" Isn't it strange that John Hinckley, Sr., is the owner of Vanderbilt Oil? And, of course, George Bush is the owner of Zapata Oil. Was it a coincidence, then, that John Hinckley, Sr., and George Bush are neighbors *for years* in Houston, Texas, working together? Is it any coincidence that John Hinckley, Sr., when you go back through the FEC, the Federal Election Commission, his own record of giving maximum donations every year to Mr. Bush even when he started running for Congress. Well now, does that make his son, John Hinckley, Jr., seem a little bit less of a coincidence? I think it does. Here's why:

When the President was shot, if you'll remember, he was pushed into the car by a man named Jerry Parr(sp?) that was his Secret Service guard. Jerry Parr fell on top of him and, I just saw in the *Reader's Digest* where Jerry Parr was telling his "valiant story." And the limousine tore off, didn't it? Now it was *five minutes later* that the ambulance arrived and they put the Secret Service man, the Washington, D.C. policeman, and Brady in the ambulance and *it* roared off. Using normal time-rate/distance, who should have arrived at George Washington University Hospital first? The President should have. Well, who did? You know it's a trick question. The ambulance arrived 15 minutes before the President. When asked, "What happened?" the Secret Service simply responded, "We got lost."

The Secret Service does not get lost in Washington, D.C. They don't get lost in most places of the world. And so, now the investigation starts to get a little interesting. When they take Ronald Reagan in, they can see that he... matter of fact, his heart almost stopped. And he is convulsing; there's blood on his lips. They know he's hurt... seriously. But they can find no wounds. They X-ray him *3 times* and can find nothing.

Finally, a nurse notices a tiny entrance wound right at the seventh rib, underneath the armpit. And a doctor takes a probe, and by... very carefully, because they couldn't see it on X-ray, the doctor is able to extract what he said was a planchet, thinner than a dime, that was one-quarter inch from Ronald Reagan's aorta.

Now, Ronald Reagan says... as a matter of fact, let me just see if I can just read it to you... best what Ronnie says. I've got all this in the book... This came right out of a newspaper:

I knew I had been hurt, but I thought that I'd been hurt by the Secret Service man landing on me in the car. As it was, I must say it was the most paralyzing pain. I've described it as if someone hit you with a hammer. But the sensation, it seemed to me, came after I was in the car and so I thought that maybe his gun or something had broken a rib. I set up on the seat, and the pain wouldn't go away -- and suddenly, I found I was coughing up blood. Now you see, to almost anyone else you might say, "Well, just some kind of a fluke." But I'm a skeptic. Because I know how these things have happened ever since they "took out" John Fitzgerald Kennedy. I think maybe JFK was the last honest President that we had... ]

[pcosmar]

Ok, I have never seen any of that. Time for a little research,
I would seem to thicken the plot.

[Primbs]

I already see holes in this story. From what I read, the Reagan limo started toward the White House which is in a slightly different direction than GWU hospital.

After a few minutes in the limo, they determined Reagan had a problem.

The hospital is not straight shot from the hotel or from the route of the hotel to the white house.

During mid day, there are huge traffic jams which can cause delays even for cars with lights and sirens. While there are some interesting elements to the story, these authors are distorting certain situations.

We are better off getting Reagan supporters to support Ron Paul. We need their votes to win. Reagan supporters in New Hampshire hate taxes. They should be Ron Paul's voters.

[CelestialRender]

I've always thought Reagan was overrated. The Republicans in the White House, since maybe Ford (don't know much about him personally) have been a bit of an embarrassment. Each has increased governmental size, more so than the Democrats in a lot of cases.

It's pretty sad that Republicans run on economic conservatism, yet Bill Clinton was by far the most fiscally sound Presidency in recent history.

[Primbs]

Congress appropriates the money. The president can veto the budget but then he shuts down the government which makes the media scream at the president.

Reagan did try to cut, but as Reagan found out, every program has their own constituency and lobby.

Every program has a congressional backer.

Many congressman's wives work for these programs. You try to cut a program you send a congressional wife to the unemployment line.

Congress has a great amount of power.

Reagan did use the bully pulpit to talk about the oversized budget.

Yes Reagan could have done better, but he also had other priorities such as cutting taxes, getting the economy going, rebuilding the military, confronting and defeating communist expansion.

[PaleoForPaul]

It's pretty sad that Republicans run on economic conservatism, yet Bill Clinton was by far the most fiscally sound Presidency in recent history.

It helps when you don't have to fight any major wars.

[BuddyRey]

I personally can't stand Reagan, but I guess I can see the appeal. At least his foreign policy stressed diplomacy. Still, his boundless charisma masked an otherwise uninspiring actor-playing-politician, IMHO. I don't know what it is about the average voters, but they seem to love the Charismatic Good Ol' Boy archetype. I prefer the Unpolished but Brilliant Nebbish, a nerdy idea guy whose lack of conventional people skills is made up for by a copious amount of creative new ideas and a boundless, scholarly mind.

[dsentell]

I am somewhat embarrassed by RPs campaign's use of Reagan. Many people that I deal with see Reagan on the slim jim and immediately dismiss RP. They remember Reaganomics and the "trickle down" effects that he propounded. By the time the "trickle down" reached these people, there was nothing left, no relief. . .

[BuddyRey]

I am somewhat embarrassed by RPs campaign's use of Reagan. Many people that I deal with see Reagan on the slim jim and immediately dismiss RP. They remember Reaganomics and the "trickle down" effects that he propounded. By the time the "trickle down" reached these people, there was nothing left, no relief. . .

I agree, the first slimjim isn't going to win over many Progressives. But did you know that they've created several different designs for different audiences now? The new ones are great. Check 'em out!

http://www.ronpaul2008store.com/servlet/Categories?category=Slim+Jims

[Indy Vidual]

*good leadership skills
*probably really cared
*did nothing of what he promised to do. Government actually expanded under his Presidency
*accepted a skull & bones neocon as his VP


overrated? I don't doubt that he was a nice guy, I just don't really know what the big thing with Reagan is? He threatened the Soviets....and? Socialism doesn't work, the free marketeers (including Ron Paul) knew this back in the peak of the Cold War. Of course, true free marketeers have always been ignored throughout the 20th century. Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard

Yes, Reagan was a great actor and speaker.
He did little to reduce the government.

and let's not forget the wonderful Nancy:

Just Say NO!



The Reagan years are highly over-rated, and the 'Drug War' legacy helped strengthen blatant Fascism in America.

[Fozz]

Bump.

Reagan was definitely overrated, and he was never a libertarian. When he was governor of California, he drastically grew the budget and raised taxes. He sounded great in his 1964 speech and 1981 Inaugural speech, but his actual accomplishments in terms of liberty were quite pathetic.

Murray Rothbard hated Ronald Reagan (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard60.html), and knew even before his election (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard50.html) that he wasn't serious about smaller government.

[Young Paleocon]

Bump.

Reagan was definitely overrated, and he was never a libertarian. When he was governor of California, he drastically grew the budget and raised taxes. He sounded great in his 1964 speech and 1981 Inaugural speech, but his actual accomplishments in terms of liberty were quite pathetic.

Murray Rothbard hated Ronald Reagan (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard60.html), and knew even before his election (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard50.html) that he wasn't serious about smaller government.

Grover Cleveland FTW aye Fozz? ;)

[kahless]

Ronald Reagan's Mistake
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/g/gay/2004/gay061304.htm



Welfare reform of the Reagan era, no matter how well-intentioned, was such an error. It is one that I cannot reconcile with conservative or any genuine American values. Under Reagan, the reach of the welfare program expanded beyond its means-tested boundaries to include families without regard to economic status and was transformed from a helping hand to a corrupt, over-controlling police organization that exercises unchecked power that far exceeds that of the IRS.

Under the weight of the huge expanded program and its billions in additional annual funding, the system of checks and balances has collapsed and basic human rights have been eliminated. Millions of ordinary people have been labeled social criminals and a significant number of them have been jailed for not living up to arbitrary standards and for not reaching sometimes unobtainable goals. In at least one case, a man was beaten to death by guards while imprisoned, not because he posed a mortal threat, but because of what the program's propaganda machine had labeled him – a "deadbeat dad." Brian Armstrong of Milford, New Hampshire lost his job. He was jailed without trial in January 2000 for missing a hearing. One week later he was dead.


You can thank Reagan as a lead contributor of the ultimate government power and involvement in family life. People then wonder why the decline in birth rates in the U.S.

[RevolutionSD]

*good leadership skills
*probably really cared
*did nothing of what he promised to do. Government actually expanded under his Presidency
*accepted a skull & bones neocon as his VP


overrated? I don't doubt that he was a nice guy, I just don't really know what the big thing with Reagan is? He threatened the Soviets....and? Socialism doesn't work, the free marketeers (including Ron Paul) knew this back in the peak of the Cold War. Of course, true free marketeers have always been ignored throughout the 20th century. Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard

raised the debt ceiling 3 times, raised taxes (despite the mythology), expanded government more than any president who came before him, got the u.s. involved in all sorts of nutty foreign entanglements....what's to like? i'll give him credit for being a good speaker and talking some libertarian talk, but that's about it.

[SimpleName]

I have read a small amount of Reagan's Diaries. I'm not sure if he ever planned for its publication, taking into account that there is even a few National Security and personal (nancy) omissions. He does in fact, contrary to my prior beliefs, quite honest. A good guy at heart. He did seem dedicated to "fixing" things even though he was pushing the wrong things sometimes. Loving guy it seems as well. Talks about Nancy as if he can't live without out her and appears to feel real distress over handicapped people (many photo ops only 50 pages in of 600 or 700). Not that any of this has to do with political success, just thought it was interesting. I really see his presidency as a failure and quite unprincipled. Definitely overrated.

One frustrating entry in his diaries includes a movie that he and Nancy had seen. Apparently there was a scene with girls smoking pot. In an unbelievably hypocritical moment, Reagan says it was terrible to see that, but that it would have been funny if the girls were drinking alcohol. So damn stupid. What the hell is the difference? This is the guy who brought us JUST SAY NO and an extreme, costly War on Drugs, so no surprise. It just made me so angry.

[Bucjason]

Reagan was awesome.


He dealt with a democrat congress his entire career and still managed to do great.

[RevolutionSD]

Reagan was awesome.


He dealt with a democrat congress his entire career and still managed to do great.

If you think what reagan did was "great", then you are clearly not a libertarian/rp supporter.

[paulitics]

Reagan was awesome.


He dealt with a democrat congress his entire career and still managed to do great.

How so?

[Fozz]

Reagan was awesome.


He dealt with a democrat congress his entire career and still managed to do great.

Read the Murray Rothbard article I linked to.

[jclay2]

Read the Murray Rothbard article I linked to.

Great Article. The info on the "tax cuts" and spending was fairly interesting. He doubled the debt and didn't really cut taxes. Thats the definition of a true conservative.

[Bucjason]

Ron Paul is a fan of Ronald Reagan.

[Stary Hickory]

I liked Reagan, I even listened to his diaries. he was good man, he had latched into some core libertarian concepts, understood the danger of Socialism, but was less enlightened than say Ron Paul. He wanted to reduce spending, get rid of big government, but was a fanatic against the threat of communism.

So in order to get the funding he needed he had to compromise wioth Democrats. I think had Reagan been given a Republican congress the government would have shrunk. But I do think military spending was Reagan's achilies heel. That and the belief that it was America's job to spread Democracy and Freedom. The federal government is only charged with preserving freedom at home, not abroad.

[Original_Intent]

I think the thing with Reagan is he is not so much over-rated as a mythos has grown up around his legacy just like the Camelot myth that surrounded JFK in Democrats minds.

He was far from perfect and I think far inferior to what Ron Paul would try to accomplish. However, Reagan managed to live thru two terms and I doubt Ron Paul would - and I am not talking about age either.

I think Reagan must have done pretty well - if not at turning the country around at least he held those who wanted to destroy it largely at bay. The fact that the left has been trying to demonize him after his terms expired and even after he did makes me feel like he was probably a better champion of liberty than hardcore libertarians will ever give him credit for.

For all that, he definitely blew it on a few things. I really wonder how much of Iran-Contra he was aware of and how much of it was done under his nose by Bush 1 and Ollie North. It waws certainly clear that he didn't know about the "Contra" aspect of Iran Contra. Bush 1 issued presidential pardons to all invoilved on Christmas Eve 1992 and had everyone's record expunged.

I think Reagan was almost certainly the most honest president of my lifetime and tried to do the right thing for the country - something we haven't seen much of since.

[Fozz]

Ron Paul is a fan of Ronald Reagan.
Ron Paul liked Reagan's rhetoric, but he was very disappointed at his presidency, he even said so in 1987, and then ran on the Libertarian ticket.

[Objectivist]

Not entirely his fault government expanded. He was very busy with the veto pen, but sometimes the Democrats over-rode his vetos.

He vetoed more than 70 bills.

Here's a laundry list for Ronnie.

Originally a Democrat New Dealer that admitted the fault in that thinking.

Oil prices dropped from RRs call for more domestic production, $36 per barrel down to $18 and then only $22 at the end of his terms.

Inflation went from 12.5% under Carter to 4.4% under RR.

16 million + jobs.

GDP growth annual rate was 3.4%.

Tax cuts on personal income of 25%.

525 Electoral College Votes, (record number) for second term.

Approval rate at end of two terms was 64%.

Had Bush as his second to counter the Soviets as Bush was the director of CIA and had insight into fighting the Cold War.

Dealt with Gorbachev and defeated the communism of that era.

Anyone else have numbers like that? I know FDR didn't and Ike had four mini recessions during his terms.

But there are criticisms to be made for spending, much of it was from the Democrats that had enough votes to do what they wanted, so like drunken sailors they spent the massive amounts of revenue that came into the coffers from the tax cuts and job creation. Milton Friedman's frustration with RR was the inability to control spending. RR also went along with certain bills that contained military spending in an effort to defeat communism, which he deemed immoral.

[Objectivist]

Is it true that Reagan was once a Democrat?

Yes and he was the President of the Screen Actors Guild.

[kahless]

I think the thing with Reagan is he is not so much over-rated as a mythos has grown up around his legacy just like the Camelot myth that surrounded JFK in Democrats minds.



I agreed with you up until here.



he was probably a better champion of liberty than hardcore libertarians will ever give him credit for.

What? Perhaps the neocons and some in the media have led you to believe this? This is the same guy that formed alliances with the left wing organizations like NOW for his own gain and resulted in policy that entrenched government into our personal lives.

Here is a good article: Ronald Reagan's Mistake
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive.../gay061304.htm



Welfare reform of the Reagan era, no matter how well-intentioned, was such an error. It is one that I cannot reconcile with conservative or any genuine American values. Under Reagan, the reach of the welfare program expanded beyond its means-tested boundaries to include families without regard to economic status and was transformed from a helping hand to a corrupt, over-controlling police organization that exercises unchecked power that far exceeds that of the IRS.

Under the weight of the huge expanded program and its billions in additional annual funding, the system of checks and balances has collapsed and basic human rights have been eliminated. Millions of ordinary people have been labeled social criminals and a significant number of them have been jailed for not living up to arbitrary standards and for not reaching sometimes unobtainable goals. In at least one case, a man was beaten to death by guards while imprisoned, not because he posed a mortal threat, but because of what the program's propaganda machine had labeled him – a "deadbeat dad." Brian Armstrong of Milford, New Hampshire lost his job. He was jailed without trial in January 2000 for missing a hearing. One week later he was dead.


It is no wonder why Ron Paul had it with Reagan and switched temporarily to the Libertarian party.

[Objectivist]

Ron Paul is better than Reagan.

In politics you are only as good as the alliances you form to carry out your agenda, or as close to your agenda as you can get.

[Objectivist]

When Reagan banned carrying guns in the state of California, he really blew it.

He did that when the Black Panthers started marching around the State Capitol with weapons.:cool:

Here's a piece on that, watch all six segments.
YouTube - Black Panthers (1968) part 6 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glUZHSKRX2s&feature=PlayList&p=E542847A798F698F&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=10)

[Number19]

*good leadership skills
*probably really cared
*did nothing of what he promised to do. Government actually expanded under his Presidency
*accepted a skull & bones neocon as his VP


overrated? I don't doubt that he was a nice guy, I just don't really know what the big thing with Reagan is? He threatened the Soviets....and? Socialism doesn't work, the free marketeers (including Ron Paul) knew this back in the peak of the Cold War. Of course, true free marketeers have always been ignored throughout the 20th century. Ludwig Von Mises, Murray RothbardIt all depends from what perspective you look at American politics. Reagan led the modern Conservative Movement into political supremacy which lasted until the 2008 elections. It remains to be seen whether it makes any kind of a come back in 2010 and 2012.

From a libertarian perspective - our perspective - he is over rated.

[Bucjason]

If you think what reagan did was "great", then you are clearly not a libertarian/rp supporter.



When you consider what he had to deal with , it was great.

I realize how some of you have no clue how the government really works, but the president is not a supreme dictator . He doesn't have the power to just snap his fingers and inact every change he wants. ( not even Obama with his fillibuster proof majorites has been able to do that ....yet).

Reagan did his best to protect individual rights , lower taxes, and get government out of our way. There was only so much he could do with the Democrats blocking everything, and the Soviet Union breathing down his neck.

His most valuable contribution though, was that he was able to articulate and communicate OUR ideals better than anyone else on our side has EVER been able too. Ron Paul's biggest weakness is that will never be able to match Reagan's ability to connect with people .

[kahless]

Reagan did his best to protect individual rights , lower taxes, and get government out of our way.

I would add foreign policy but it still escapes me how anyone could say Reagan "did his best to protect individual rights". How? This is a myth since as I posted above one example of how Reagan expanded the welfare police state and intruded on personal liberties. I swear I think when people hear welfare or welfare reform they think it only effects poor people when the reality is it effects the privacy and individual rights of ALL working Americans.

[Athan]

Great president? Guess you haven't heard of Rex 84 order.

[Aratus]

Is it true that Reagan was once a Democrat?

Yes he was...in the 193os when it was the popular and trendy thing to do!

[Aratus]

.
.

I had to look deep into my computer for this one. I think you will find it interesting.
Check near bottom of this for CFR influence on Bush for VP.

This article comes from
Tom Flocco.com
http://tomflocco.com/




HINCKLEY AND BUSH FAMILIES WERE CLOSE FRIENDS
December 22, 2003



HINCKLEY AND BUSH FAMILIES WERE CLOSE FRIENDS

by Connie Cook Smith
(printed with permission)
http://www.conniescomments.blogspot.com

Everyone knows who John Hinckley, Jr. is. This youngest Hinckley son is now being permitted unsupervised visits within the Washington, DC metropolitan area--away from his mental facility, after nearly killing President Reagan in 1981. But a much more interesting subject is, who is John Hinckley, Sr.?

In 1980, Hinckley Sr. was a Texas oilman who, the records show, strove mightily to get fellow Texas oilman George H.W. Bush the Republican nomination for president. The Bushes and the Hinckleys were frequent dinner companions.

But far beyond their social connection, neither Bush nor Hinckley wanted Ronald Reagan to become president, because Reagan was opposed to tax breaks for the oil industry to which Bush, Hinckley and other Texans were highly dependent.

The effort to make Bush Sr. president in 1980 failed; but he and his friend and backer Hinckley Sr. got the next best thing – the "heartbeat away from the presidency" office of Vice-President of the United States.

A couple months later, Hinckley Jr. shot Reagan, and Bush Sr. very nearly did become president at that time, after all. Curiously, only one time was it announced on the news about the connections between the Bush and Hinckley families: An almost bewildered John Chancellor on NBC Nightly News reported "the bizarre coincidence" that Vice President Bush's son, Neil, and Scott Hinckley had dinner plans for March 31, 1981 -- now cancelled, of course. [But even Chancellor failed to mention the close friendship between the the assassin's father and Vice President Bush--let alone the rest of the corporate media.]

Reports indicate that the Bush family strove mightily to keep this information from the American people. And some reports list this incredible "coincidence" -- directly linked to the assassination attempt of President Reagan -- as one of the most spiked stories of the last century.

In other words, the brother of the shooter and the son of the vice-president (and their wives) had a dinner date for the day after the shooting. But it really wasn’t such "a bizarre coincidence." Those two families were very close; but the press never focused on that critical fact as it should have. If Reagan had died, the oilmen’s interests would have been served.

Some people think that Hinckley Jr. was mind-controlled, CIA-style, to shoot Reagan. George Bush Sr. was head of the CIA a few years before. Others think that young Hinckley wanted to please his dad and get Bush, his dad’s candidate and close friend, into the presidency for him after all.

Interestingly, legal experts note that the crime occurred in Washington, D.C., the only venue in the United States at that time which recognized an insanity defense. If the kid committed the crime in D.C., he would never serve hard time? Well, coincidentally, that's where he committed it.

A very good read on the Hinckley-Bush connections is a book that came out about 20 years ago, entitled, "The Afternoon of March 30." It was published as a novel in order to protect the author. This book is now more relevant than ever, and it can be obtained at:
http://www.nathanielblumberg.com/bush.htm.

But there’s another coincidence to mention. In January of 1963, President John F. Kennedy announced his plan to cut the tax breaks for the oil industry. Oilmen H.L. Hunt, George H.W. Bush (head of Zapata Petroleum), and others were no doubt enraged. What a curious twist of fate that Kennedy was shot in Texas later that same year.

In the 1990's, LBJ’s now-undisputed mistress Madeleine Brown announced that LBJ told her that Kennedy was murdered "by the oil people, and aspects of the CIA."

And gosh, one more coincidence – we now have another Bush, the oilman’s son, becoming U.S. President in a very quirky election. And many individuals believe he gave the American people completely phony reasons for invading Iraq-- one of the most oil-rich nations in the Middle East.

Hmm....

[ Sidebar: Many other significant facts concerning the Bush and Hinckley families have remained unexplored and unexplained, in addition to other matters related to the assassination attempt detailed in Blumberg's book which is found at:
http://www.nathanielblumberg.com/bush.htm :

1. Neil Bush, a landman for Amoco Oil, told Denver reporters he had met Scott Hinckley at a surprise party at the Bush home January 23, 1981 [Nine weeks before Hinckley's brother John Jr. attempted to assassinate President Reagan--which would have elevated Bush Sr. to the presidency], and approximately three weeks after the U.S. Department of Energy had begun what was termed a "routine audit" of the books of the Vanderbilt Energy Corporation, the Hinckley oil company. In an incredible coincidence, on the morning of March 30 [the day of the Reagan assassination attempt by John Hinckley, Jr.], three representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy told Scott Hinckley, John Hinckley Jr.'s older brother and Vanderbilt's vice president of operations, that auditors had uncovered evidence of pricing violations on crude oil sold by the company from 1977 through 1980. The auditors announced that the federal government was considering a penalty of two million dollars. [This, on the same day that his brother John--the youngest son of Vice President Bush's close friend--attempted the assassination!] Scott Hinckley reportedly requested "several hours to come up with an explanation" of the serious overcharges. The meeting ended a little more than an hour before John Hinckly Jr. shot President Reagan.

2. Excerpts from an interview by Theresa Walla, United Press International, March 9, 1985: Journalism professor Nathaniel Blumberg was so disturbed about the investigation into the attempted assassination of President Reagan that he turned his suspicions into a 377-page novel.

In The Afternoon of March 30 , Blumberg blends fact and fiction in looking at the unreported "connections" between Hinckley's family and that of Vice President George Bush, the man who came within a heartbeat of the presidency of the United States.

"What I'm really after is the case to be officially reopened," said the Rhodes scholar and former dean of the University of Montana journalism school. "If they can answer all the questions satisfactorily, I'll be delighted," he said in an interview. "In truth, I don't think all the questions can be answered without opening up a whole new can of worms."

Blumberg's unease is now focused on the indifference shown to what he calls "the story behind the story." Bush, he said, has questions to answer in connection with the attempt. So do the FBI and the judge who presided over Hinckley's trial, according to Blumberg.

"I'm not saying there was a conspiracy to assassinate Reagan," Blumberg emphasized. "I'm saying there was a conspiracy to keep significant information from the public that it has a right to know."

Blumberg asks his readers to consider his contentions that journalists were fed a barely believable story full of inconsistencies. A long-time media critic, he decided the example warranted more than a critique of press performance in a crisis. Such efforts, he said, usually "go out there and die." Instead, he chose to weave his questions into a novel so it would reach a broader audience and allow him to probe problems in society and corruption in government, as well as maladies of the U.S. press.

His book chronicles the adventures of a fictitious Montana newsman who follows the information trail deserted by the national media. His documentation is put in the form of an article the fictitious hero is writing. Blumberg published the book on his own Wood FIRE Ashes Press to retain total control over the quality.

"Have you ever heard an author say what a great job his publisher did with a book?" he asks. But, without a commercial advertising campaign, he's had to market the book in an "organic, straightforward fashion." Blumberg says he mails out several copies of the novel each week and expects it to "stay alive as long as people continue to care about justice." ]

http://www.conniescomments.blogspot.com

(submitted/posted by Connie Cook Smith)





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


( Further Reading )

Links For The Reagan Assassination
And The Bush And Hinckley Families:

http://www.Padrak.com/alt/BUSHBOOK_7.html
THE ATTEMPTED COUP D'ETAT OF MARCH 30, 1981---Incredible Info.

http://John-Lennon.net

http://www.GeorgeWalkerBush.net

http://www.KMF.org/williams/bushbook.html

http://www.geocities.com/prohibition_us/dui.html

http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/HINCKLEY.htm

Thanks to Mark Elsis ( Lovearth.net ) for above
additional research links.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MORE LINKS AND RESEARCH ON REAGAN ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT:

[ Special thanks to Virginia Raines ( rainesco@earthlink.net ) for yet more intriguing information and incredible links concerning Bush-Hinckley, evidence that Hinckley did not carry out the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan. At the least, there has been much left out and covered up. And anyone who has the least bit of interest in getting to the TRUTH of 9-11 should take note that incredible evidence and even strikingly curious "coincidences" get swept under the rug in key historical cases such as this one. Moreover, one only needs to examine the useless 9-11 Commission which refuses to publicly examine officials in charge on the day of the attack UNDER OATH as an example of how to cover up the largest mass murder in U.S. history. Here is Virginia Raines' research and look at further evidence in the Reagan assassination attempt:

There are further questions -- particularly the World Vision connection. Here are a few bits to add to the query. Please share this information with Connie or anyone else who has doubts about the official story of the attempt on Reagan's life.

Reagan was blackmailed into taking on Bush as VP. Within just a few months, Bush Sr. was essentially co-president (or more).

"Bush is functioning much like a co-president. George is involved in all the national security stuff because of his special background as CIA director." -- White House press secretary James Brady, March 1981 Chapter XVII - 'The Attempted Coup D'Etat of March 30, 1981' 'George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography' by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin.

Video Evidence: Did Hinckley Really Shoot Reagan?
http://www.noveltynet.org/content/paranormal/www.parascope.com/mx/articles/hinckley.htm


[[Note that Reagan didn't think he was hit by a bullet at all -- and that leaves another question about just what happened; this is snipped from another page of the Tarpley and Chaitkin book]]

"Only the sixth and last bullet found Reagan, striking his armpit and tunneling into his chest. The president felt a sharp pain but thought it was only from Parr pushing him so hard. He looked at Parr and made a feeble joke: 'You sonofabitch, you broke my rib' just as the limousine raced away from the scene."


Namebase: (see social network diagram by clicking link)
http://www.namebase.org/main4/World-Vision.html



[[snipped from an intenet list -- this portion written by Brian Downing Quig]]

Of course there was a connection to Bush. The information below is very uninformed. At the time John Hinkley "shot" Reagan Hinkley's brother was having dinner with one of the Bush sons. Hinkley's father was a close friend of Bush senior and the number 2 man in a CIA front called WORLD VISION SOCIETY. The WORLD VISION SOCIETY purported to feed the world's hungry while all along their purpose was to manage refugee camps from which to recruit assassins. Today the WORLD VISION SOCIETY manages the refugee camp at the old Jones Town location where the CIA's Hmong mercenaries now are.

Chapman, the assassin of John Lennon, worked at a WORLD VISION SOCIETY managed refugee camp for the Cuban boat people at Fort Chaffee with the remnents of ALPHA 66. As Lennon was shot, president elect Reagan and his chosen CIA Director Bill Casey clinked champaign glasses a few blocks away in a New York City hotel. That is how they set the tenor of their administration.

And remember, the doctors said they removed a disc from Reagan--not a bullet. Barbara Honegger thinks Brady was the intended victim because of what he knew about the deal Reagan cut with the Iranians to delay the hostage release.



http://www.babelmagazine.com/issue82/jonestown.html:

Jonestown, CIA, World Vision, Hinckley and Bush from Internet posting:

One of the strangest CIA connections to Jonestown was World Vision, an evangelical order which often fronts for the CIA. They performed espionage work for the CIA in Southeast Asia while Operation Phoenix (the murderous project that left 40,000 people dead) was in full effect. In Honduras, they maintained a presence at CIA contra recruiting camps in the war against the Sandinistas. In Lebanon, the fascist Phalange butchered Palestinians at World Vision's camp. In Cuba, their refugee camps hosted numerous members of the anti-Castro terrorist group Alpha 66 of Bay of Pigs fame.

After the Guyana massacre, World Vision developed a scheme to repopulate Jonestown with CIA-linked mercenaries from Laos. Laos, of course, was where the CIA was running its "secret war" during Vietnam, which for the most part was a smokescreen for a widespread opium trafficking operation.

One particularly important World Vision official was John Hinckley, Sr., an oil man, reputed CIA officer, and friend of George Bush. You may have heard of his son.

Less than four months before Hinckley Jr. became known as Jodie Foster's biggest fan, another member of the World Vision order, Mark Chapman, gunned down John Lennon in what may have been a practice run for the bigger hit on President Reagan. One of the policemen who found him was convinced that he was a mind-controlled assassin. Chapman was clutching a copy of the novel "Catcher in the Rye," which was also owned by John Hinckley Jr. (The book was written by J.D. Salinger, who worked in military intelligence with Henry Kissinger during World War II.) Before going to trial, Chapman pleaded guilty after a voice in his head (which he attributed to God) commanded him to do so.

Considering the history of World Vision and what went on previously in Guyana, it is possible that the real purpose behind repopulating Jonestown was to create another breeding ground for brainwashed zombies like Chapman and Hinckley. Near Jonestown there was a place called Hilltown, a compound of 8,000 blacks that followed cult leader Rabbi David Hill, who held his flock with an iron fist. Hill had so much power that he was referred to as the "vice prime minister" of Guyana. There was also another place in Guyana called "Johnstown," as well as similar operations in the Philippines and Chile. It appears that Jonestown (and World Vision's later attempt) is hardly the exception to the rule of using obscure locations in Third World nations as laboratories for covert cult operations.

[[The "Cleon" mentioned here would be Cleon Skousen, I think. Gritz isn't always the best source for information, but what he says here can be found in other reports as well.]]



http://www.ez-websites.com/grudge/bo.htm

Excerpts from a talk given by Lt. Col. "Bo" Gritz in Mesa, Arizona on April 4, 1992:

In Mesa, I met with him [Cleon Skaas(?)] and I said, "Why in the world did Ronald Reagan sell us down the tube by taking George Bush as his running mate?" And I really didn't know that Cleon knew Ronald Reagan rather well. But he told me: He said, "Bo, George Bush was Ronald Reagan's greatest opponent," (if you'll remember, back in the 1980 elections), "and Ronald Reagan said he would never have him. Then, Ronald Reagan was invited to New York to go see Rockefeller. When he saw Rockefeller, he was told, 'If you do not take my head of the Trilateral Commission'" (remember, the Council on Foreign Relations, George Bush) "'as your running mate, the only way you'll see the inside of the White House is as a tourist.'"

Two months after he was inaugurated, two months is all that Ronald Reagan lasted. March 30th, 1981, two months after his inauguration in January of 1981, he was shot -- was he not? And the news said that he was shot by John Hinckley, Jr., and that John Hinckley, Jr., was some kind of a Jodie Foster freak. And that he came out of nowhere, and that he shot Brady in the head, and he shot a policeman in the neck, and he shot a Secret Service man and blew him back over the vehicle, and he shot Ronald Reagan. Right?

Well, remember the hardware. That's why I gave you a little introduction... I did. [Gritz had talked earlier about some sophisticated "tools of the trade."] Soon as I see this stuff I begin to wonder, because I've been a part of these kinds of operations. Let's just go back and review. It's all in the book [*Called to Serve*(?)], and so, very quickly I'll run down through you.

When Brady was shot, no question. Here we've got John Hinckley, Jr., Oh, by the way, is John Hinckley, Jr., just some kind of a "weirdo?" Isn't it strange that John Hinckley, Sr., is the owner of Vanderbilt Oil? And, of course, George Bush is the owner of Zapata Oil. Was it a coincidence, then, that John Hinckley, Sr., and George Bush are neighbors *for years* in Houston, Texas, working together? Is it any coincidence that John Hinckley, Sr., when you go back through the FEC, the Federal Election Commission, his own record of giving maximum donations every year to Mr. Bush even when he started running for Congress. Well now, does that make his son, John Hinckley, Jr., seem a little bit less of a coincidence? I think it does. Here's why:

When the President was shot, if you'll remember, he was pushed into the car by a man named Jerry Parr(sp?) that was his Secret Service guard. Jerry Parr fell on top of him and, I just saw in the *Reader's Digest* where Jerry Parr was telling his "valiant story." And the limousine tore off, didn't it? Now it was *five minutes later* that the ambulance arrived and they put the Secret Service man, the Washington, D.C. policeman, and Brady in the ambulance and *it* roared off. Using normal time-rate/distance, who should have arrived at George Washington University Hospital first? The President should have. Well, who did? You know it's a trick question. The ambulance arrived 15 minutes before the President. When asked, "What happened?" the Secret Service simply responded, "We got lost."

The Secret Service does not get lost in Washington, D.C. They don't get lost in most places of the world. And so, now the investigation starts to get a little interesting. When they take Ronald Reagan in, they can see that he... matter of fact, his heart almost stopped. And he is convulsing; there's blood on his lips. They know he's hurt... seriously. But they can find no wounds. They X-ray him *3 times* and can find nothing.

Finally, a nurse notices a tiny entrance wound right at the seventh rib, underneath the armpit. And a doctor takes a probe, and by... very carefully, because they couldn't see it on X-ray, the doctor is able to extract what he said was a planchet, thinner than a dime, that was one-quarter inch from Ronald Reagan's aorta.

Now, Ronald Reagan says... as a matter of fact, let me just see if I can just read it to you... best what Ronnie says. I've got all this in the book... This came right out of a newspaper:

I knew I had been hurt, but I thought that I'd been hurt by the Secret Service man landing on me in the car. As it was, I must say it was the most paralyzing pain. I've described it as if someone hit you with a hammer. But the sensation, it seemed to me, came after I was in the car and so I thought that maybe his gun or something had broken a rib. I set up on the seat, and the pain wouldn't go away -- and suddenly, I found I was coughing up blood. Now you see, to almost anyone else you might say, "Well, just some kind of a fluke." But I'm a skeptic. Because I know how these things have happened ever since they "took out" John Fitzgerald Kennedy. I think maybe JFK was the last honest President that we had... ]

[Krugminator2]

An all you that were disappointed in Reagan will probably be more disapointed in RP. When he doesn't wave his hand and the country is pure again, you will be cursing him.


I would have voted for Reagan over RP in 1980 but I would vote for RP over Reagan now. The times are different.


I really didn't want to get into this debate but like normal people like to bring up subjects that will hurt RP's cause as long as they have their free speach.
I remember how Reagan was savaged by the democrats and the press about the soup kitchens, the Reaganvilles, the homeless, and how he cut the safety net. I remember how he lost 24 house seats in '82, a House that was already controled by the democrats. I remember how every budget he proposed was declared "dead on Arrival" by the the congressional leaders.
We will see how RP does when he refuses to sign an unbalanced budget and every federal worker is out on the street and every state worker that relies on federal funding as well. Wait until he loses 100 house seats and 25 senate seats. How effective will he be?
Reagan wasn't perfect and neither is RP. The American people are not going to give RP a congress that will go along with him. They will give him a congress that will be fighting tooth and nail to keep everyones favorite federal program. That is the reality of our politics.

Some pretty bold statements for this forum in 2007. Very well thought out posts. Reagan was a great man and a great President.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Yes. Highly overrated. Not "bad", but the cult of Reagan has done far more harm toward American conservatism than good.

[RJ Liberty]

The Reagan administration saw the expansion of the CIA, a focus of the federal government on overseas regime change, the building of a shadow government (http://theconsciousresistance.com/2016/04/reagan-aides-secret-government/), and the slow deterioration of a moral America through a "greed is good" mantra espoused by his staffers.

[Swordsmyth]

Reagan never should have made Bush VP, after the assassination attempt it was the Bush administration.

[TheTexan]

Reagan was pretty good but Trump is still way better

[Krugminator2]

The Reagan administration saw the expansion of the CIA, a focus of the federal government on overseas regime change, the building of a shadow government (http://theconsciousresistance.com/2016/04/reagan-aides-secret-government/), and the slow deterioration of a moral America through a "greed is good" mantra espoused by his staffers.


You want to know what else he did? He got oil production back on track, beat inflation at a high political cost, cut the top tax rate by 2/3rds, ended the Cold War without firing a shot and started nuclear arms reduction that still exists today. He was a great negotiator. Tough by willing to listen. The Iranians knew their country would leveled if they didn't release the US hostages. They weren't dealing with cuckold Jimmy Carter anymore. When the air traffic controllers broke the law and went on strike, Reagan didn't negotiate. He gave them two days to get back to work then and then fired them permanently. Unions have been losing steam since.

And before President, he put 125 domestic terrorists in the hospital and killed 2. You want to loot and destroy public property? Great. Enjoy your broken spine.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B21KMA31hM8

No one in his admin said greed is good. But greed is good. The corporate raiders of the 80s were heroes would made American business great again. They forced bloated businesses to cut costs and and not exist just to line the pockets of management and labor at the expense of long term growth.

[Anti Globalist]

Lol 11 year necro bump.

[Ender]

Reagan's legacy is NOT what most think- here's just a small truth unveiling that few know:


According to another theory – a quaint little notion that I like to refer to as “verifiable history” – the CIA, operating out of that U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1953, maliciously and illegally overthrew a relatively democratic and liberal parliamentary government, and with it the 1951 Time magazine man of the year Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, because Mossadegh insisted that Iran’s oil wealth enrich Iranians rather than foreign corporations.

The CIA installed a dictatorship run by the Shah of Iran who quickly became a major source of profits for U.S. weapons makers, and his nation a testing ground for surveillance techniques and human rights abuses. The U.S. government encouraged the Shah’s development of a nuclear energy program. But the Shah impoverished and alienated the people of Iran, including hundreds of thousands educated abroad.

A secular pro-democracy revolution nonviolently overthrew the Shah in January 1979, but it was a revolution without a leader or a plan for governing. It was co-opted by rightwing religious forces led by a man who pretended briefly to favor democratic reform. The U.S. government, operating out of the same embassy despised by many in Iran since 1953, explored possible means of keeping the Shah in power, but some in the CIA worked to facilitate what they saw as the second best option: a theocracy that would substitute religious fanaticism and oppression for populist and nationalist demands.

When the U.S. embassy was taken over by an unarmed crowd the next November, immediately following the public announcement of the Shah’s arrival in the United States, and with fears of another U.S.-led coup widespread in Tehran, a sit-in planned for two or three days was co-opted, as the whole revolution had been, by mullahs with connections to the CIA and an extremely anti-democratic agenda.

They later made a deal with U.S. Republicans, as Robert Parry and others have well documented, to keep the hostage crisis going until Carter lost the 1980 presidential election to Ronald Reagan. Reagan’s government secretly renewed weapons sales to the new Iranian dictatorship despite its public anti-American stance and with no more concern for its religious fervor than for that of future al Qaeda leaders who would spend the 1980s fighting the Soviets with U.S. weapons in Afghanistan.

At the same time, the Reagan administration made similarly profitable deals with Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq, which had launched a war on Iran and continued it with U.S. support through the length of the Reagan presidency. The mad military investment in the United States that took off with Reagan and again with George W. Bush, and which continues to this day, has made the nation of Iran – which asserts its serious independence from U.S. rule – a target of threatened war and actual sanctions and terrorism.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/02/david-swanson/waking-up-to-irans-real-history/

[timosman]

Lol 11 year necro bump.

Aratus is a stalker: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/search.php?do=process&titleonly=1&query=overrated :cool:

[Brian4Liberty]

Hard to say who was greater, Reagan or St. McCain?

[Zippyjuan]

Reagan never should have made Bush VP, after the assassination attempt it was the Bush administration.

So basically the entire Reagan administration was the Bush administration? Reagan was never president? (the assassination attempt occurred less than three months-69 days- into his eight year presidency). His actions as president were not that different from his actions as the Governor of California.

[Swordsmyth]

So basically the entire Reagan administration was the Bush administration? Reagan was never president? (the assassination attempt occurred less than three months-69 days- into his eight year presidency).
:check:


His actions as president were not that different from his actions as the Governor of California.
:negative:

[Zippyjuan]

:check:


:negative:

Care to elaborate? He was not involved in international issues nearly as much as Governor but he signed what was at the time the biggest tax cuts in history followed by the biggest tax increases both as governor and as President.

[Swordsmyth]

Care to elaborate? He was not involved in international issues nearly as much as Governor but he signed what was at the time the biggest tax cuts in history followed by the biggest tax increases both as governor and as President.
It is complicated and not worth my time since he is dead and you are a troll.

[Zippyjuan]

It is complicated and not worth my time since he is dead and you are a troll.

I see. An impressive list of examples. Thank you for sharing.

[RJ Liberty]

You want to know what else he did? He got oil production back on track, beat inflation at a high political cost, cut the top tax rate by 2/3rds, ended the Cold War without firing a shot and started nuclear arms reduction that still exists today. He was a great negotiator. Tough by willing to listen. The Iranians knew their country would leveled if they didn't release the US hostages. They weren't dealing with cuckold Jimmy Carter anymore.

Ender's link, on the previous page, explains exactly how Reagan was able to negotiate for the hostages: he prevented Carter from doing so. That's not heroism; that's disgusting.





And before President, he put 125 domestic terrorists in the hospital and killed 2. You want to loot and destroy public property? Great. Enjoy your broken spine.

When you kill a terrorist, you only create two or three or four more: his sons. Have you really learned nothing from the endless "War on Terror"? The wars we began have an entire new generation of terrorists aligned against us.



No one in his admin said greed is good. But greed is good.

*sigh* Yes, greed is great; that's just what we need: more corporate greed, more bankers bilking honest people.

I witnessed the "greed is good" mantra bubbling to the surface in the 1980s, during the Reagan era, and I saw it destroy many good people, and their credit. I also more recently witnessed people like Bernie Madoff, Robert Courtney, and Martin Shkreli bilk millions of people in the name of this philosophy. I've witnessed the erosion of America's ethics because of the "greed is good" fallacy. We knew trickle-down economics was a failure by 1982 (https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1982/4/20/dismantling-reaganomics-pbdburing-the-last-week/).

[Krugminator2]

When you kill a terrorist, you only create two or three or four more: his sons. Have you really learned nothing from the endless "War on Terror"? The wars we began have an entire new generation of terrorists aligned against us.

I don't think so. I think the hippies got the message. Hippies understand bullets and bayonettes




*sigh* Yes, greed is great; that's just what we need: more corporate greed, more bankers bilking honest people.

I witnessed the "greed is good" mantra bubbling to the surface in the 1980s, during the Reagan era, and I saw it destroy many good people, and their credit. I also more recently witnessed people like Bernie Madoff, Robert Courtney, and Martin Shkreli bilk millions of people in the name of this philosophy. I've witnessed the erosion of America's ethics because of the "greed is good" fallacy. We knew trickle-down economics was a failure by 1982 (https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1982/4/20/dismantling-reaganomics-pbdburing-the-last-week/).

I have know idea what that garbled mess is supposed to mean. Corporate greed? What kind of person with liberty in their name talks like that? I have no idea what trickle down economics even is.

Milton Friedman lists Reagan's sticking to principles in 1982 at great political cost when socialists and economic illiterates crowed about how low taxes low inflation and deregulation don't work. Reagan took the political hit to break the back of inflation and that alone makes him a great president.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ASAOrsKqiI

[RJ Liberty]

I have know idea what that garbled mess is supposed to mean.

:tears: